So there’s a lot of debate about the ending and I wanted to throw in my observation and opinion. I have arrived at two possible theories to describe the ending of the film. I will look at the functionality and meaning of the totem and wedding ring.
THE TOTEM -- THE TOP
[Who handles the ‘top’ totem?]
Mal, Saito, Cobb
[What does Arthur say about the rules of a totem and what does this really mean?]
When Ariadne reaches for his totem, Arthur says, “Well nah, that would defeat the purpose. See only I know how this feels. It’s uniqueness. The totem allows you to know if you’re in someone else’s dream.”
What he is saying is that only the user knows the uniqueness, so he knows if the totem signals I’m in someone else’s dream or I’m not in someone else’s dream. He DOES NOT state, that it tells the difference between dreams and reality. We cannot make that inference based on the information we’ve been given.
Furthermore, he never says that if someone else touches the totem it will lose some sort of power. All he says is that the only the user is able to know the difference. This means that anyone can use a totem but only, Arthur in this instance, will know the uniqueness.
However, this concept of knowing the difference is unique. It’s like watching a magic trick. If you know how the trick works, it’s different for you than someone who doesn’t know. Let’s say you have small jewelry box with a small trap door. If you use it and make the jewel inside disappear you know why and how it works but if someone else uses it and it disappears they acknowledge that an action has taken place but they don’t understand the inner working of it. If they did this in front of you, you would visually tell the difference and they wouldn’t –it would fly under their nose.
This concept is important for what I will talk about later.
[What is Mal’s relationship to the totem?]
Now, from what Cobb says, it was Mal’s idea to use the totem. The top was Mal’s totem. Cobb says that for her, in someones dream it would just spin and spin and spin. This information tells us two things: 1) Specifically how Mal’s totem works—its uniqueness and 2) that Cobb knows this uniqueness.
So when Mal doesn’t want to accept the reality of limbo as a dream but rather as THE reality, she hides her totem away so she’ll never know the difference (specifically, she places the totem in the safe on its side). Inception occurs when Cobb finds the totem and decides that he and Mal need to get out of limbo. To do this, knowing the top’s uniqueness, Cobb spins the top because he knows that since they are in limbo (a presumed false reality) it will keep spinning. All this is to function so that when Mal sees it, remembering its uniqueness, she realizes she’s in a dream (whose dream is for another debate but for now we will say limbo). Hence, inception.
[About Cobb’s?]
When Cobb uses the totem throughout the film, he knows its uniqueness so he’s able to tell if he’s in someone else dream or not. This is not to say that he himself isn’t dreaming but only that he isn’t in someone else’s dream.
[What about Saito and the totem?]
Saito is never given the information of the top’s uniqueness. To him, it’s just a spinning top. So in the scenes where Saito is old, him spinning the top is not to tell himself that he’s in someone else’s dream, it’s just him spinning the top. However, to Cobb sitting across the table, he knows its uniqueness and knows that he is still in limbo.
[So at the end, is he dreaming, in someone else’s reality, or in the real world?]
Because of the points I made about Arthur’s explanation, there is nothing to say he is ever REALLY in the the so-called real world, only that he isn’t in someone else’s dream (shown by the times we see the top fall). So I cannot for certain, going with this theory, say that he is in the real world.
When we see the top spinning in the movie, it is completely stationary and spinning—perfect. This is the tip off that Cobb, or the user of that totem, is in someone else’s dream. At the end, we can hear and see the top moves. I won’t be so bold as to say wobble but it moves. This diversion of the perfection we’ve seen hitherto would hint that it is topple over. If this is the case, then we know that we aren’t in someone else’s dream.
However, all this is to say that if the we aren’t in someone else’s dream world whose dream world are we in? Can we be certain it is Cobb’s? Why not, the childrens (just for debate)?
THE WEDDING RING
This is a so simple it can’t be right…or can it?
If you watch the beginning, you’ll notice that Cobb washes up on the shores wearing a wedding ring. He is at this point (because we see this loop at the end) in some sort of limbo/dreamworld (see above theory). Now when he comes out of the dreamworlds of Arthur and Nash’s, after trying extraction on Saito, he is no longer wearing a ring. Now without going into the symbolism of the ring I will stick to the functionality of the ring.
I believe that the ring, not the totem, is the true tell of being in a dream or not (or rather someone else dream to the contrary).
I believe this because throughtout the rest of the film, Cobb only has the ring on in the “dreamworld.” When he’s in the assumed “real world” he never has it on. If this is indeed the real signifier, then at the end we know he’s not in the dream world (or at least anyone elses) because he’s not wearing a ring. This would follow with the “rule” the movie has cleverly and subtlety laid in place. The totem, is the ultimate form of misdirection. The entire movie, the emphasis is put on the totem in that we never really pay attention to the little detail of the ring. Even at the end it’s on the totem and not the ring.
[But what about the “flashbacks”?]
When Cobb is telling Ariadne about Mal and her death, we see these “flashbacks” of Cobb wearing the ring. I would argue that the world of the flashback does not apply to the same rule as the dreams. What I mean to say is that, the ring showing up in the flashback is functional to the story of Cobb and Mal’s relationship. They were married, hence, they have rings in the “actual” past (via the flashback). So we cannot state that this idea of the wedding ring theory is countered by the inclusion of said wedding ring in the flashback.
THE VERDICT?
Honestly, these are just theories so I cannot say which, if either at all, is the right answer but it’s sure fun to think about! Thoughts?
THE TOTEM -- THE TOP
[Who handles the ‘top’ totem?]
Mal, Saito, Cobb
[What does Arthur say about the rules of a totem and what does this really mean?]
When Ariadne reaches for his totem, Arthur says, “Well nah, that would defeat the purpose. See only I know how this feels. It’s uniqueness. The totem allows you to know if you’re in someone else’s dream.”
What he is saying is that only the user knows the uniqueness, so he knows if the totem signals I’m in someone else’s dream or I’m not in someone else’s dream. He DOES NOT state, that it tells the difference between dreams and reality. We cannot make that inference based on the information we’ve been given.
Furthermore, he never says that if someone else touches the totem it will lose some sort of power. All he says is that the only the user is able to know the difference. This means that anyone can use a totem but only, Arthur in this instance, will know the uniqueness.
However, this concept of knowing the difference is unique. It’s like watching a magic trick. If you know how the trick works, it’s different for you than someone who doesn’t know. Let’s say you have small jewelry box with a small trap door. If you use it and make the jewel inside disappear you know why and how it works but if someone else uses it and it disappears they acknowledge that an action has taken place but they don’t understand the inner working of it. If they did this in front of you, you would visually tell the difference and they wouldn’t –it would fly under their nose.
This concept is important for what I will talk about later.
[What is Mal’s relationship to the totem?]
Now, from what Cobb says, it was Mal’s idea to use the totem. The top was Mal’s totem. Cobb says that for her, in someones dream it would just spin and spin and spin. This information tells us two things: 1) Specifically how Mal’s totem works—its uniqueness and 2) that Cobb knows this uniqueness.
So when Mal doesn’t want to accept the reality of limbo as a dream but rather as THE reality, she hides her totem away so she’ll never know the difference (specifically, she places the totem in the safe on its side). Inception occurs when Cobb finds the totem and decides that he and Mal need to get out of limbo. To do this, knowing the top’s uniqueness, Cobb spins the top because he knows that since they are in limbo (a presumed false reality) it will keep spinning. All this is to function so that when Mal sees it, remembering its uniqueness, she realizes she’s in a dream (whose dream is for another debate but for now we will say limbo). Hence, inception.
[About Cobb’s?]
When Cobb uses the totem throughout the film, he knows its uniqueness so he’s able to tell if he’s in someone else dream or not. This is not to say that he himself isn’t dreaming but only that he isn’t in someone else’s dream.
[What about Saito and the totem?]
Saito is never given the information of the top’s uniqueness. To him, it’s just a spinning top. So in the scenes where Saito is old, him spinning the top is not to tell himself that he’s in someone else’s dream, it’s just him spinning the top. However, to Cobb sitting across the table, he knows its uniqueness and knows that he is still in limbo.
[So at the end, is he dreaming, in someone else’s reality, or in the real world?]
Because of the points I made about Arthur’s explanation, there is nothing to say he is ever REALLY in the the so-called real world, only that he isn’t in someone else’s dream (shown by the times we see the top fall). So I cannot for certain, going with this theory, say that he is in the real world.
When we see the top spinning in the movie, it is completely stationary and spinning—perfect. This is the tip off that Cobb, or the user of that totem, is in someone else’s dream. At the end, we can hear and see the top moves. I won’t be so bold as to say wobble but it moves. This diversion of the perfection we’ve seen hitherto would hint that it is topple over. If this is the case, then we know that we aren’t in someone else’s dream.
However, all this is to say that if the we aren’t in someone else’s dream world whose dream world are we in? Can we be certain it is Cobb’s? Why not, the childrens (just for debate)?
THE WEDDING RING
This is a so simple it can’t be right…or can it?
If you watch the beginning, you’ll notice that Cobb washes up on the shores wearing a wedding ring. He is at this point (because we see this loop at the end) in some sort of limbo/dreamworld (see above theory). Now when he comes out of the dreamworlds of Arthur and Nash’s, after trying extraction on Saito, he is no longer wearing a ring. Now without going into the symbolism of the ring I will stick to the functionality of the ring.
I believe that the ring, not the totem, is the true tell of being in a dream or not (or rather someone else dream to the contrary).
I believe this because throughtout the rest of the film, Cobb only has the ring on in the “dreamworld.” When he’s in the assumed “real world” he never has it on. If this is indeed the real signifier, then at the end we know he’s not in the dream world (or at least anyone elses) because he’s not wearing a ring. This would follow with the “rule” the movie has cleverly and subtlety laid in place. The totem, is the ultimate form of misdirection. The entire movie, the emphasis is put on the totem in that we never really pay attention to the little detail of the ring. Even at the end it’s on the totem and not the ring.
[But what about the “flashbacks”?]
When Cobb is telling Ariadne about Mal and her death, we see these “flashbacks” of Cobb wearing the ring. I would argue that the world of the flashback does not apply to the same rule as the dreams. What I mean to say is that, the ring showing up in the flashback is functional to the story of Cobb and Mal’s relationship. They were married, hence, they have rings in the “actual” past (via the flashback). So we cannot state that this idea of the wedding ring theory is countered by the inclusion of said wedding ring in the flashback.
THE VERDICT?
Honestly, these are just theories so I cannot say which, if either at all, is the right answer but it’s sure fun to think about! Thoughts?